DEATHSPELL OMEGA and S.V.E.S.T. offer two glances right into the primeval fracture, the suppurating wound at the heart of everything, the fissure undermining up to the least attempt at harmony. Summa Divisio, the first of all divisions, the mother of all scissions and the annunciation of woe and affliction to come.

The work of both bands can be understood as a variation on a same theme, independent yet complementary.

Released as a noble gatefold LP featuring both bands and as two digipak mini-cds, each featuring one band, with identical artwork and layout.

In fact, I think the info is valuable, I don´t visit other sites than MA, and this kind of threads are important not to discussion, but to keep in touch. I think this is great news, DsO is one of the best and more original BM bands at the moment, so it is not irrelevant!
Now, what about SVEST, are they good or what?, and by the way, is there anything about the third and final part of the infamous trilogy started with Si Monumentum...?

_________________Slavishly steered by redemptionStricken by Biblical wrathWhen solutions lie in compassionate logicNot hearsay but the will of man

I read about this on FMP forum. This sounds interesting. SVEST are one of the best post-2000 black metal bands active today. Their full length was excellent. I'm very much looking forward to at least hearing their side of the split.

_________________Winds and storms embrace us now
Lay waste the light of day
Open gates to darker lands
We spread our wings and fly away

Deathspell Omega is an alright band, more-so within their earlier releases, Infernal Battles and Inquisitors of Satan, as well as their split-releases with Clandestine Blaze and Moonblood. However, their more-recent material, in my opinion, is not-as-great as their older albums.

Anyways, I'll give this split release a listen, though, as it might be an improvement from Fas....

I'm a fan of Deathspell and S.V.E.S.T. seems to be good if the reviews on their page are to be believed so I look forward to this release with great interest.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

Because Si Monumentum pretty much sounds like Dark Funeral with 20 times the number of notes but doesn't add up to anything more interesting than Dark Funeral with 20 times the number of notes.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

Because Si Monumentum pretty much sounds like Dark Funeral with 20 times the number of notes but doesn't add up to anything more interesting than Dark Funeral with 20 times the number of notes.

It was also needlessly long and drawn-out, and all those ambient sections were about as interesting as individually counting all the strands of hair on my balls.

I'm a fan of Deathspell and S.V.E.S.T. seems to be good if the reviews on their page are to be believed so I look forward to this release with great interest.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

DSO has the same problems Satyricon had before they started making blacknroll. They've always been a band riding on the coattails of popular, better bands and by dint of their outspoken pseudo-mystique placed themselves in the forefront of a black metal subgenre they had no hand in creating and to which they brought no innovations to speak of. Turning from competent if unspectacular Darkthrone worship to the copy-pasting of Swedish based "orthodox black metal", they finally wowed the magazines and fanboys by their radical new direction, ie. jazzy, chaotic death metal that still doesn't bring anything new to the table.

Now, none of this would have been a problem if their songwriting stayed on the competent-if-pedestrian level of their early years, but starting from Si Monumentum their ambitions largely outgrew their compositional skills, resulting in a largely unconnected string of half-baked ideas and semi-technical riffs that just sat there pretending complexity while missing the basic fundamentals of song-writing. Quite frankly, their songs are a mess, with Fas being the most egregious example yet. This record is only complex to people who get off on Meshugga. They threw a bunch of tremolo and power chord passages into a blender, copy-pasted a bunch of standard slow discordant segments straight out of the burzum-book-riffs in between and padded it out with samples and ambient noodling. People then called it a genius example of "black metal growing up".

I'm a fan of Deathspell and S.V.E.S.T. seems to be good if the reviews on their page are to be believed so I look forward to this release with great interest.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

DSO has the same problems Satyricon had before they started making blacknroll. They've always been a band riding on the coattails of popular, better bands and by dint of their outspoken pseudo-mystique placed themselves in the forefront of a black metal subgenre they had no hand in creating and to which they brought no innovations to speak of. Turning from competent if unspectacular Darkthrone worship to the copy-pasting of Swedish based "orthodox black metal", they finally wowed the magazines and fanboys by their radical new direction, ie. jazzy, chaotic death metal that still doesn't bring anything new to the table.

Now, none of this would have been a problem if their songwriting stayed on the competent-if-pedestrian level of their early years, but starting from Si Monumentum their ambitions largely outgrew their compositional skills, resulting in a largely unconnected string of half-baked ideas and semi-technical riffs that just sat there pretending complexity while missing the basic fundamentals of song-writing. Quite frankly, their songs are a mess, with Fas being the most egregious example yet. This record is only complex to people who get off on Meshugga. They threw a bunch of tremolo and power chord passages into a blender, copy-pasted a bunch of standard slow discordant segments straight out of the burzum-book-riffs in between and padded it out with samples and ambient noodling. People then called it a genius example of "black metal growing up".

I hate just agreeing without adding my own two cents, but you pretty much nailed it, and said it alot better than I could have.

People confuse incomprehensibility with intellect and Deathspell Omega has managed to master that. No Deathspell Omega riff does anything interesting as none of them are melodic in nature; they're simply very conventional black metal riffs with random strange chord shapes thrown in, making for music about as random as Zarach 'Baal' Tharagh but without any of the integrity. They don't invert traditional black metal standards, they just overdrive them so they hope you don't notice they're still playing the same crap that the black metal scene has seen for years, thus Dark Funeral with 20 times the notes, similarly echoed by needlessly technical drums. The lyrics are admittedly very well written but the vocals are just slathered all over the music because the lyrics were written without any regard for meter. The ambient material is boring and only compelling to people who already have a semi-hard dick from all the orthodox Satanism crap.

In short, they're fantastically popular because black metal fans have no critical thinking skills.

Thanks for the thought-out response, Mornox. I disagree, but I think that you've given the issue some thought. I've got my own reasons for my opinion, but I'll present them in a forthcoming review; I think that will be a better format, considering how much I have to say on the band.

As for Noktorn, I don't take his opinion into account at all ever since he gave Carnivorous Vagina's Istinto Omicida a 70%.

I'm a fan of Deathspell and S.V.E.S.T. seems to be good if the reviews on their page are to be believed so I look forward to this release with great interest.

Also, I'm curious to hear why those who don't like DSO or their later material hold their opinions, with a few caveats. First, I don't think that the theistic Satanism and band ideology argument is relevant and would prefer to discuss only the band's music. Second, I haven't heard Fas, so I'd prefer to hear analyses of other releases. I don't want to cause an argument and I promise not to engage in rampant fanboyism, I just want to hear articulate criticisms of Deathspell.

Well, I can offer an explanation if you want. First and foremost, I have heard their later-era material, consisting of Si... and Fas..., however their musical change from the rather Darkthrone (Under a Funeral Moon and Transilvanian Hunger-influenced era)influenced style to their rather "experimental" (looking for a better word) style. It's just that I happen to enjoy the "raw"-aspect that's present within their first two full-length albums, Infernal Battles and Inquisitors of Satan (as well as within their early splits with Clandestine Blaze and Moonblood), rather then the "clean" production that they implement in their later-era work.

Also, the vocal style is a factor, too. Simply, the vocal-work that Shaxul implements is much more emotion-driven and passionate, rather than Miko Aspa's low, guttural vocal approach (which isn't necessarily bad, but I think that Shaxul's singing approach is better, simply said).

Then, more of a personal preference, I simply tend to enjoy the classic black metal sound that Darkthrone and the other noteworthy Norwegian acts pioneered, rather then the later-era of Deathspell Omega. However, the material presented in Si... and Fas... is not bad, by any means, rather I simply find their old material to be more enjoyable and interesting.

Also, within their early splits with Clandestine Blaze and Moonblood, I think that Deathspell Omega (their early era, with Shaxul) managed to create some great, exceptional black metal (despite it not being rather "original" per se).

Overall, it's all about personal music taste, in my case, especially within terms of black metal playing styles.

Hopefully, this is a valid reason, but that's up to whoever interprets this explanation.

Overall, it's all about personal music taste, in my case, especially within terms of black metal playing styles.

Hopefully, this is a valid reason, but that's up to whoever interprets this explanation.

I would say that you've given some very valid reasons. I love their old material as well, but I agree that it's quite different. I would say that I just happen to enjoy both traditional and 'experimental' (or orthodox, or whatever) styles of black metal.

Overall, it's all about personal music taste, in my case, especially within terms of black metal playing styles.

Hopefully, this is a valid reason, but that's up to whoever interprets this explanation.

I would say that you've given some very valid reasons. I love their old material as well, but I agree that it's quite different. I would say that I just happen to enjoy both traditional and 'experimental' (or orthodox, or whatever) styles of black metal.

Ah, okay. I wasn't entirely sure whether my response was enough, or to less. Thanks for the confirmation, though.

Look, its not hard, people have started threads about upcoming albums that fit into the forum's guidelines just fine. Heres a fucking obvious example as to what you could have included along with the article:

"Has anyone else heard about this? I for one am quite pleased to see that they are finally putting out some new material, despite it only being one song. Does anyone have any more info on this release by any chance? Share your thoughts!"

No, nor is it so original or insightful that including it in the OP is anything more than an empty gesture. Seriously, "Has anyone heard of this? Does anyone have any more info? Share your thoughts." is pretty much implied. If you're going to try to enforce a minimum level of discussion, at least do it so that a little bit of thought is required; don't encourage redundancy for the sake of the appearance of depth.

People on this forum spend too much time--and waste too much bandwidth--arguing what does and does not constitute a "good post." Some posters need to put more energy into their own contributions and focus less on the relative merit of others.

Look, its not hard, people have started threads about upcoming albums that fit into the forum's guidelines just fine. Heres a fucking obvious example as to what you could have included along with the article:

"Has anyone else heard about this? I for one am quite pleased to see that they are finally putting out some new material, despite it only being one song. Does anyone have any more info on this release by any chance? Share your thoughts!"

Really, is that so hard?

haha, wow.

Yes, instead of posting the news as I did, obviously inviting discussion, I should have wasted space and bandwidth with empty gestures, the answers of which I already know, and/or are implied in the posting itself.

Your suggestion is actually as absurd as the strawman I set up earlier. (Hey guyz I wondur wut this will sound like lol looking forward to it!)

What's the point? You people need to chill out and think for a minute.

The whole argument is made even more absurd by this dude's suggestion as to what would have satisfied his requirement: Empty, forced gestures which are already implied in the posting. What does this mean? It means that he is not operating on the principle of content being superior to meaningless posting, but rather obstinately clutching a "rule" and bitching after others have failed to join him in doing something ridiculous.

He doesn't care if there's any content in the post, he just wants text.

Fucking comical.

Last edited by Clockhand on Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:01 pm, edited 4 times in total.

I seriously do not see the problem with the OP. It was a bit of news about an upcoming metal release with the naturally implied invitation for discussion on the release itself and the merits/flaws of the bands involved. And hey will you look at that, with the exception of three posters, everyone remained on topic! Guess who the off-topic posters are? Seriously rexxz and Nordic_Warhammer, I normally respect you guys, but you really shot yourself in the foot after putting it in your mouth first. Be a bit less overzealous, alright?

And hey will you look at that, with the exception of three posters, everyone remained on topic! Guess who the off-topic posters are? Seriously rexxz and Nordic_Warhammer, I normally respect you guys, but you really shot yourself in the foot after putting it in your mouth first. Be a bit less overzealous, alright?

Right.

They've lowered the level of discussion in an attempt at raising it. The problem is they've demonstrated that they really aren't interested in raising the level of discussion in the first place: We've seen that they'll accept text in place of content. So, ultimately what they're really doing is bitching mindlessly about the lack of text in my post.

The "no cut-and-paste" rule applies chiefly in the Symposium, in cases where redundancy is involved, and in cases where the thread would probably be useless regardless of format--e.g. "look at this mainstream magazine's stupid 'metal' list" or some variation of "the kids at school don't understand me", and so on. A closely-related (but not to be conflated) rule concerns threads that are essentially lists of lists with no other content. It does not normally apply to threads like this in the Metal section ("look who died, alas, poor _____, I knew him well" is another common example).

Make no mistake. It would please me greatly if people would display the same kind of zest for and willingness to provide the depth of content in Metal topics that they do (or try to do) in Symposium topics, but I sincerely doubt that could ever be brought about, even if we had a 99:1 ratio of mods to regular posters. In the wages of the world, sometimes pragmatics must trump principle.

I have seen a few "comical" things in my time. This is not one of them. I implore my colleagues and other posters to heed my words above, and act accordingly in the future. I also strongly advise that one particular party dispenses with the snotty tone; being correct does not (and never has) also necessarily entailed being blameless. Most conflicts of this nature result from a failure on my part in clearly communicating procedure to other janitors, and not from these agents themselves. You would do well to remember this before copping an attitude with them.

Now, back to the subject at hand.

Edit: And because it's liable to come up (yet again), no, I will not delete Kruel's review for Circumspice, at very least not until something better of similar overall appraisal emerges.

_________________The bizarre lattices were all around. Sticks and bits of board nailed together in fantastic array. It should've been ridiculous. Instead it seemed oddly sinister--these inexplicable lattices spread through a wilderness bearing little evidence that man had ever passed through...

I have seen a few "comical" things in my time. This is not one of them. I implore my colleagues and other posters to heed my words above, and act accordingly in the future. I also strongly advise that one particular party dispenses with the snotty tone; being correct does not (and never has) also necessarily entailed being blameless. Most conflicts of this nature result from a failure on my part in clearly communicating procedure to other janitors, and not from these agents themselves. You would do well to remember this before copping an attitude with them.

This whole fiasco is certainly a bit silly. I don't think of the rule itself as comical, but the implication that my providing worthless text in place of content would have kept me from being censured sure is.

Concerning not being blameless, I thought of something useful which I could have included in the OP: I wonder if this will be another 18-20 minute escapade, like the other splits. I'd rather it not be forced. I feel like "Mass grave..." and "Diabolus..." both could've been shorter, and either equally or more interesting than they are.

Nightgaunt wrote:

Edit: And because it's liable to come up (yet again), no, I will not delete Kruel's review for Circumspice, at very least not until something better of similar overall appraisal emerges.

That review really is grating. Hopefully someone will take you up on this.

Derailing the thread even further, apparently we're going to be treated to a new The Ruins of Beverast full length this winter!

Edit: And because it's liable to come up (yet again), no, I will not delete Kruel's review for Circumspice, at very least not until something better of similar overall appraisal emerges.

That has to be one of the worst reviews on the site. It's just a long rant about how he thinks DsO is christian, But then again, he is a lowlife with seven thousand posts trying to be one of those tr00 metal elitist fags.

I can't wait for the new split. DsO is good but S.V.E.S.T is definitely the reason i'm gonna actually go and buy/order it.

Edit: And because it's liable to come up (yet again), no, I will not delete Kruel's review for Circumspice, at very least not until something better of similar overall appraisal emerges.

That review really is grating. Hopefully someone will take you up on this.

I personally enjoy the review and I think Kruel does well to articulate what many of us feel when listening to the album. I personally wouldn't give it a zero, in fact I find it enjoyable on some levels, but it certainly does frustrate me for many of the same reasons explained in the review.

What basis do you have for asking to delete the review other than difference in opinion/taste?

The review falls into the "TL;DR" category for one thing, then he spends three quarters of the review whining about Christianity. I agree with him when he finally starts actually talking about the music though.

Well, that depends on the nature of MA's reviewing standards. If MA is attempting to be objective beyond criticism, the review should stay.

If they were to decide that reviews which are obviously unreasonable (yes, arbitrarily) weren't to remain on the site, sure, Kruel's bullshit would be deleted. (Because it is painfully obvious that his entire position is derived from his central complaint: He thinks DsO are christians, and thus no matter what htey produced, or what they said, he would hilariously give their work the lowest rating available.) He also gets to spite fanboys simultaneously by knocking down the overall rating as much as a single stroke allows. Yus! Reading it, he seems like the type of guy who, if he had heard the album before hearing ANY hype or reading into the lyrics, he'd probably have reviewed it at 50-75%... but he's just so mad that he's gonna stomp his feet and ruin all the fanboy's lives by giving their christian faggot black metal idols a o%. *beats chest*

I'd also delete the Fas review by Lana. As I have said elsewhere, if you think DsO are trying to sound like Opeth, and that Mikko Aspa wants to be Mikael Akerfeldt, you are not reasonable. (she says this) You may not have ears, in fact. She also gave the album, which she clearly does not understand in the slightest, the lowest possible rating.

Contrast this with wagontrain's earnest and reasoned criticism of Fas. That I disagree with him so wholeheartedly is irrelevant, because he was reasonable.

Again, it's a question of what role MA would like to play. Leaving reviews like Lana's up is definitely the safer route. It negatively effects my experience at the site, sure, but it doesn't take very long for me to skim reviews until I find decent ones.